[Part 20]

[Benton Bradberry’s 2012 book, “The Myth of German Villainy” is a superb, must-read, revisionist look at how the German people have been systematically, relentlessly and most importantly, unjustly vilified as the arch criminal of the 20th century. Bradberry sets out, coolly and calmly as befits a former US-Navy officer and pilot, to show why and how the German people have been falsely accused of massive crimes and that their chief accuser and tormenter, organized jewry is in fact the real party guilty of monstrous crimes against Germans and the rest of the world.

n Part 20 the Allied goal of carrying out genocide against the German civilian population is described, starting with the Lindemann Plan — “strategic bombing” — formulated by the German born jew, Frederick Lindemann, and other jews. Lindemann advocated the killing of massive numbers through saturation bombing raids, particularly of high density working class areas. By the end of the war some 160 of Germany’s largest cities had been reduced to rubble.

One infamous case of wanton sadism committed by the Allies was the destruction of Dresden starting on February 13, 1945, a city with little to none military value, and with the end of the war (May 8) just a few months away. A total of 1,300 British and American heavy bombers dropped nearly 4,000 tons of high explosive bombs and incendiary devices on Dresden, followed with American Mustang fighter planes strafing survivors. Estimates of the number killed range from David Irving’s, 135,000, to up to 500,000.

Winston Churchill had earlier in the war, said:

“The air opened paths along which death and terror could be carried far behind the lines of the actual enemy; to women, children, the aged, the sick, who in earlier struggles would perforce have been left untouched.”

Also discussed is the infamous Morgenthau Plan and how it’s origins came from jews within the Soviet Union through the secret communist spy agency in Washington called the “Silvermaster Group” that the jew Harry Dexter White belonged to. White was given the job because of his relationship with Morgenthau, and Morgenthau’s closes relationship with Roosevelt. White got to work immediately and produced the infamous Plan. The plan as described in Morgenthau’s book, “Germany is Our Problem — A Plan for Germany” called for the de-industrialization of Germany, an act that would lead to millions of German deaths through starvation.

International jewry, fully in control of the Allies, had a pathological hatred for the German people and harbored a burning desire for vengeance. Despite Germany’s constant willingness to end the war, the unconditional surrender policy of the Allies, its knowledge of the Morgenthau Plan and similar plans for their total destruction, the Germans came to understand that they had no choice but to fight on, and ensured that millions more would die and Europe ruined.

At the end of the war, jewish sadism continued on, with the kangaroo court cases of the Nuremberg Trials and the creation of the “Holocaust” myth, a diabolical lie used against Germans, and Whites in general, today — KATANA.]

NOTE: The author has very generously given me permission to reproduce the material here — KATANA.

Chapter 21

The Allied Goal?

Destruction of Germany!

“You must understand that this war is not against Hitler or National Socialism, but against the strength of the German people, which is to be smashed once and for all, regardless whether it is in the hands of Hitler or a Jesuit priest.”

Winston Churchill, 1940, as quoted in Emrys Hughes book, “Winston Churchill, His Career in War and Peace.”

[Add image] Emrys Hughes, and his 1950 book, “Winston Churchill in War and Peace”.

Frederick Lindemann, later known as Lord Cherwell, was a Jew born in Baden-Baden, Germany but raised in England. He went back to Germany to obtain a Ph.D. in physics from the University of Berlin, after which, he returned to England. Lindemann was an early pioneer of British aviation technological development, and when Churchill became Prime Minister, he appointed Lindemann as the British government’s (and his) leading scientific advisor. As a Jew, Lindemann harbored a pathological hatred, not only of the Nazis, but of Germany and the German people.

[Add image] Jewish-British Frederick Lindeman, an advisor to Churchill and promoter of the bombing of German civilians.

Vengeance against the Germans motivated his every action and opinion. He was a leading advocate from the start of “area bombing” of German cities, and devised a “plan” to carry it out.

The Lindemann Plan proposed that Britain should forget military targets and concentrate air attacks on Germany’s civilian population in order to break the morale of the German people. After their morale was broken, Lindemann believed, and Churchill believed also, the German public would demand an unconditional surrender to the Allies. His plan proposed that;

“bombing must be directed to working class houses. Middle class houses have too much space round them, so are bound to waste bombs.”

“It should be emphasized,” Lindemann said;

“that the destruction of houses, public utilities, transport and lives, the creation of a refugee problem on an unprecedented scale, and the breakdown of morale both at home and at the battle fronts by fear of extended and intensified bombing, are accepted and intended aims of our bombing policy. They are not by-products of attempts to hit factories.”

In other words, killing massive numbers of civilians should be the primary aim of the bombing raids.

Lindemann was not writing in a vacuum when he created the Lindemann Plan. Professor Solly Zuckerman and Professor Desmond Bernal, both Jews, also did studies on the effects of area bombing on structures and people, and both became strong advocates of massive bombing of Germany.

[Add image] Jewish-British Solly Zuckerman and John Bernal, both promoters of the bombing of German civilians.

Bombing cities as a means of waging total war had already become an accepted strategy among the members of Britain’s “war party.” Britain began developing and building long range, heavy bombers as early as 1933. The United States did the same.

[Part 19]

[Benton Bradberry’s 2012 book, “The Myth of German Villainy” is a superb, must-read, revisionist look at how the German people have been systematically, relentlessly and most importantly, unjustly vilified as the arch criminal of the 20th century. Bradberry sets out, coolly and calmly as befits a former US-Navy officer and pilot, to show why and how the German people have been falsely accused of massive crimes and that their chief accuser and tormenter, organized jewry is in fact the real party guilty of monstrous crimes against Germans and the rest of the world.

Part 19 starts with the German invasion of France via Belgium, Holland, and Luxembourg on May 1940, thus ending the so-called “Phony War“. This was an essential survival reaction to the planned invasion of Germany by a British/French army. The “miracle at Dunkirk” was in fact an extraordinary peace overture, made by Hitler, to England. Despite this and repeated peace offers made by Germany, Churchill, the front-man for the jewish supported “War Party“, rejected them all.

Churchill’s personality is described, with his life-long love of war and indifference to the massive deaths of innocent people.

Hess’ flight to Scotland to negotiate with a group of pro-German elitists in Britain, known as the “Cliveden Set”, is described and how Hitler had hoped that if successful it would;“bring about, if not a military alliance of Germany with England against Russia, then to bring about a neutralization of England.”

Both Churchill and Roosevelt worked together to bring America into the war, using among other methods, the jewish control over Hollywood to pump out pro-British, anti-German propaganda to bring America into the war on Britain’s side.

Unable to lure Germany into open war with America directly, Roosevelt achieved it by provoking the Japanese to attack at Pearl Harbor. The Tripartite Agreement then brought Germany into a war with the United States, accomplishing both Churchill and Roosevelt’s aim.

The Germans were then, as defenders of Western Christian Civilization, arrayed against not only a rapacious foe, the Soviet Union which threatened to sweep over and obliterate Europe, but also the “arsenal of democracy” the United States and its massive industrial capacity, able to supply all its allies without limit. Behind these forces against Germany stood Organized Jewry, directing the ever-growing carnage — KATANA.]

NOTE: The author has very generously given me permission to reproduce the material here — KATANA.

Chapter 20

Germany Invades France

Through the Low Countries

The Phony War Ends

On May 10, the same day Churchill became Prime Minister, Germany invaded Belgium, Holland, and Luxembourg, as the only viable pathway into France, which was Germany’s primary goal. This must also be seen as a pre-emptive strike, as Britain had already sent large numbers of troops into France, and a combined British/French army of 500,000 men was at that moment being organized for an invasion of Germany. Since their declaration of war on Germany, both Britain and France had been frantically building up their military forces in preparation for an all out offensive against Germany. Germany, as previously discussed, had tried to avoid a war with Britain and France, and even made a formal peace offer to both countries after the Polish war ended, but it was rejected out of hand. Not only did Britain and France reject Germany’s offer of peace, but went even further and began a relentless naval campaign against Germany, known as the Battle of the Atlantic, which included a naval blockade of German ports. It was clear that a land attack on Germany would follow as soon as the Allied military build-up was ready.

What was Germany to do, wait helplessly for the inevitable invasion? Again, Hitler seized the initiative and beat them to the punch with his invasion of the Low Countries on May 10 and his rapid push into France. France’s impregnable Maginot Line blocked a German invasion across the German/French border, but the Maginot Line extended only to the Luxembourg border. The border between France and Belgium, and France and Luxembourg was unfortified all the way to the English Channel. An invasion of France would have to go around the Maginot Line, through the only route available, and that would be through the Netherlands, Belgium or Luxembourg. Again, Hitler’s initiative was “reactive” in nature, and essentially “defensive” as opposed to “offensive.” All of Hitler’s military initiatives were of this nature; all the result of Allied provocations or of Allied threats. Britain, led by Churchill, was the provocateur throughout.

Three days after becoming Prime Minister, and three days after the German invasion of the Low Countries, Churchill addressed the House of Commons and made his melodramatic “blood, sweat and tears” speech. In the speech, he declared British war aims as:

“Victory. Victory at all costs. Victory in spite of all terror. Victory, however long and hard the road may be, for without victory there is no survival.”

Churchill deliberately ignored the fact that Adolf Hitler had made numerous peace overtures to Britain, had repeatedly expressed his admiration for the British Empire, had even offered German military assistance if needed by the British Empire, and had made repeated attempts to establish friendly relations with Britain, all of which were spurned. Germany had no designs on Britain and wanted above all else to avoid a war. It should also be remembered that Britain and France declared war on Germany, not the other way around. Germany’s occupation of Norway, as well as the invasion of the Low Countries, were actually defensive in nature, though Churchill and his “war party” held them up as the ultimate proof of Germany’s plan to conquer the world. Perhaps they even believed it.

Churchill’s life dream had at last come true. He was now Prime Minister of England, fulfilling his imagined destiny of heroically leading the British Empire to victory in war. Making peace with Germany was the farthest thing from his mind.

On May 10, 1940, German bombers hit air bases in France, Luxembourg, Belgium, and the Netherlands, destroying large numbers of Allied planes on the ground and crippling Allied air defenses. Elite squads of German paratroopers were dropped onto fortified Allied points along the front, neutralizing a key element of France’s defense strategy.

On the ground, German forces advanced in two directions: one through the Netherlands and northern Belgium (as Britain and France had expected) and the other, larger force to the south, through Luxembourg and into the Ardennes Forest on a path that led directly into the French heartland (which was completely unexpected). Unaware of the German advance to the south through the Ardennes Forest, Britain and France sent the bulk of their troops to Belgium.

During the first days of the attack, German progress toward Brussels and The Hague was slowed unexpectedly by the formidable resistance of the Dutch forces. On May 14, when the Dutch forces refused to surrender, the German Luftwaffe was unleashed for a massive bombing attack on central Rotterdam. Efforts were made to call the bombers back when the Dutch suddenly agreed to negotiate, but only a few of the German pilots received the message and turned back. The remaining bombers continued on and dropped their bombs on the city, killing more than 800 civilians. The Netherlands surrendered that same day.

The British and French plan to defend Belgium was to make a stand at a line of forts between the cities of Antwerp and Liege. Unaware that these forts had already been captured by German paratrooper units on the first night of the invasion, the British and French armies found themselves under attack on May 13. At the same time, the second German offensive to the south emerged from the Ardennes Forest, to the complete surprise of the Allies. Over the next few days, the main Allied armies were trapped between the two German forces, able neither to protect Paris nor to stop the Germans from advancing to the English Channel. Then, when the German troops to the south moved between the French and British forces, the Allies were divided and thus weakened still further. The Allied defense of Belgium turned out to be an unequivocal disaster.

German tanks emerge from the Ardennes Forest

While the main French army was trapped between the two German armies, the British Expeditionary Force (BEF) was pushed to the coast near the French port of Dunkirk. Over 200,000 British and 140,000 French, 340,000 in all, were trapped on the beaches of Dunkirk; sitting ducks for the German forces pressing in on them.

[ John Friend of The Realist Report interviews German-Canadian activist Monika Schaefer on her awakening to the destructive activities of organized jewry and its ongoing plan of genocide against Whites. Having spent her entire adult life involved in various environmental causes it was only in the last few years that she became aware that 9/11 was an “inside job” carried out by organized jewry.

One thing led to another, and she then became aware of revisionism and that the “Holocaust” is a diabolical hoax perpetrated by the usual suspects against Germans in particular and Whites in general.

She went public with her views in June 2016 with the release of a short video titled, “Sorry Mom, I was Wrong About the Holocaust“. Despite being a prominent, well-respected individual of long-standing in the “Gingerbread Town” of Jasper, Alberta, she has faced social ostracism and a process of “ritual defamation” from leading members of the community — KATANA.]

_________________________

The Realist Report

On this edition of The Realist Report, we’re joined by Monika Schaefer, a courageous activist and truth-seeker openly exposing the fake Jewish “Holocaust” narrative and other extremely controversial topics. Monika’s brother, Alfred, was recently a guest on The Realist Report.

In this podcast, Monika and I discuss her background, education, and upbringing before moving on to address her awakening process to the lies endlessly promoted and perpetuated by the mainstream mass media, Hollywood, modern educational establishment and virtually all Western governments pertaining to the alleged Jewish “Holocaust” during WWII. Monika gives us her take on the fake “Holocaust” narrative and offers her perspective on Adolf Hitler and National Socialist Germany. We also address a number of other important topics in this podcast, including the reality of Jewish power and influence in the Western world, the systematic promotion of policies designed to genocide the White race, 9/11 and the “Global War on Terror,” and related matters.

The Realist Report

Interviews

Monika Schaefer

Published on May 17, 2017

TRANSCRIPT

(89 mins)

[00:55]

John: All right folks, welcome back to another edition of The Realist Report. This is your host John Friend. The website is The Realist Report dot com, where you can find an extensive archive of these podcasts, as well as other radio broadcasts I’ve participated in. You can also find all of my articles and blog posts, a contact page with my personal email address, my Twitter feed — which is embedded on the right hand side of the website, and all sorts of other useful information and links. I am a regular reporter for American Free Press, America’s last real paper. And I also contribute to the Barnes Review, a bi-monthly history magazine, affiliated with American Free Press. Both publications are worth subscribing to and I highly encourage listeners to do so, if they are not already. Visit American Free Press dot net and Barnes Review dot org, for more details.

All right, with that said, I’d like to introduce my special guest this evening. Monika Schaefer is joining us for the very first time. Monika is a courageous activist and truth seeker who has openly and quite publicly challenged a number of taboo topics in modern Western society, including the fake jewish “Holocaust” narrative, which is endlessly promoted and perpetuated by the educational, media and political establishment, here in the West.

Monika, thank you so much for joining me! How are you this evening?

Monika:Hello John! Thank you so much for having me on! And I am doing very well, thank you, very much. And I honestly thank you for all the good work you do! Yeah, I’ve been listening to your podcasts for a while and reading some of your articles. And I think you do excellent work!

John: Thank you very much, I really appreciate it. And, you know, it’s funny I feel like I know you although we’ve never actually spoken. Maybe it’s, because I’ve interviewed your brother Alfred a couple times now, here on The Realist Report? And I’ve seen some of your video, a couple which we’ll talk about in this podcast. Yes, but I don’t know, I just have this strange feeling that somehow we know each other but, I know we actually don’t. So, it’s great for you to finally be here and, you know, we can kind of get to know each other in real life I guess, or at least over the Internet, as best we can.

Monika:Yes, and I had that sensation too! Yes, that’s right, just from listening to your talk with a number of people and so, it does feel like we know each other probably, because we’re on the same page on a lot of these issues, I think.

John: Yes, I think so. And your brother’s always great talking to. I actually recently interviewed him just a couple of weeks ago. And we dealt with a number of topics that I’m sure we’ll be getting into, in this podcast. So I guess, just to get started, could you kind of tell us a little bit about your background, your education and your upbringing. And perhaps, maybe your professional experience, if you feel that is relevant. Let’s kind of start there, just kind of introduce yourself, please.

[04:27]

Monika: Sure. I grew up in Edmonton, Alberta, Canada and my parents came from Germany in the early 50’s. And I was born in 1959, the fourth in a family of five children. And we grew up in a very, I would say, traditional German household, you know, the way we celebrated certain times of year, in a very German style. Like Christmas, you know, we had the real candles on the tree and that kind of thing. And something that I really feel, that affected us deeply was our parents’ love of nature. Even though we grew up in the city we were very, very connected to the natural world. We had a huge vegetable garden always, and we put great value on going for walks, like as a family. We would go for walks in the river valley and just really appreciate nature. That went very, very deep.

And yeah, as I was growing up, you know, learning in school, the usual things that we were learning in those days, in the sixties and seventies. And I had, like Germar Rudolf — and you interviewed him recently — and he talks about his very developed sense of justice. I could relate to that when he spoke of that. I feel that applies to me, too. I started to become an activist in environmental things and social justice things, very, very early in my life. Like during my teen years. And then all through my adult life I was very much an activist. And it was always on environmental things and also peace issues.

[Here’s the transcript of a short YouTube video by Colin Liddell from Alternative Right website on the banning of the “neo-nazi” group National Action in Britain. He also discusses The Daily Stormer — KATANA.]

YouTube Description

While cycling along a Tokyo dyke in a storm — as you do — Colin Liddell, the Chief Editor of Alternative Right, discusses a recent debate about Stormerism (the tendency of some Alt-Righters to LARP as full-blown Hollywood Nazis). This is then linked to the recent banning by the British government of National Action, a group that employs Stormerist tactics. He also draws attention to the interesting fact that where Neo-Nazied Stormerist excesses are directly banned by the state, nationalist movements tend to do rather well, and where they aren’t they tend to do badly.

TRANSCRIPT

[Note: For “stylistic” reasons Liddell chose to record this while riding a bike along a dyke on a stormy day, making it hard to hear some parts. Text has now been updated with the missing parts.]

Colin Liddell: Hello! Friends, followers and fellow fake fascists of the Alternative Right. This is Colin Liddell, the chief editor of Alternative Right.

And, here I am cycling along Tokyo’s flood defenses, on my way to one of my “normie” jobs. And as you can see the weather is a bit inclement today. So, I don’t think I want to talk for too long. But, you know, I’ve been a bit busy to make a video for a couple of weeks, so, and this is the first one for at least two or three weeks, I think. And it’s been a very kind of eventful sort of three weeks, as it always is in the Alternative Right. Never a dull moment.

There’s been a bit of a spat with The Daily Stormer and Andrew Anglin. And I think, well, you know, Greg Johnson wrote an article at Counter Currents called “Punching Right“, and I think anybody who was anybody in the ’punching right’ debate kind of pitched in, so that was kind of interesting, I think. I expressed my opinion there. I said, … I think one of my most interesting points was that the Daily Stormer lures people into a state of inauthenticity, having a fake position in private, having a different position in public life — whichever one is fake, whichever one is genuine who knows. Suspicions abound.

Anyway, it’s not a healthy way to be, to sort of believe something, or to be lured into believing in something that you can’t actually talk to normal people about! That is obviously a ghettoizing mechanism to prevent White nationalism, which is a natural ideology of most people, because it suits their interests. That’s obviously a ghettoizing device to stop White nationalism spreading. And it’s a kind of anti, … The left would see it as an anti-contagion device — and that’s a disease metaphor. So, we would not use that, obviously. We would see, we would see it more in terms of spreading enlightenment.

See if I can just fix my hat here. No, no, the winds is keeping it there! Anyway, have a look around. There’s an interesting vista — some motorways over there, bridges, dredging the river, … And I’m actually cycling along a large dyke, which is relatively, relatively deserted. Just one, or two other lonely cyclists on their way to work at this early hour in the morning.

Anyway, back to the big debate, … Also, I think another thing that ties into this “punching Right” debate is the banning of this so-called “neo-Nazi group“, National Action in the UK. They were banned, I think just yesterday, by the Home Secretary who goes by the name of Amber Rudd, which is a soft sounding name especially for a Conservative. And anyway, they were banned. Now, National Action, they kind of dress up in scary costumes with skull masks and black ninja costumes and they wave their obviously very fascistic looking flags. And there is usually about, like, 10 to 20 of them. And if they stick around for more than five minutes the anti-fa usually give them a hard time. So they kind of pop up and they pop down a lot. And I’ve always seen them as a kind of cosplay neo-Nazi LARPy* group.

* A live action role-playing game (LARP) is a form of role-playing game where the participants physically act out their characters’ actions. The players pursue goals within a fictional setting represented by the real world while interacting with each other in character.

And so, I think banning them isn’t actually, you know, really it’s almost an irrelevance. But, I think the only significant point is that the state can use these little shock groups to justify clamping down on things like social media, more and more. It becomes permissible for social media to throw perfectly moderate and calm people off their platforms, because such groups exist!

And, you know, we saw that with, when Andrew Anglin was on Twitter. He was very active, and of course, you know, he sort of set a precedent for Twitter throwing people off. And then, they then used that power more recently against many members of the Alt-Right, including their Richard Spencer. And then, they kind of, you know, they retracted that suspension in the case of Richard Spencer. But, you know, it’s just something they can do any time they feel like now. And they can always justify it and back it up with:

“Look at these neo-Nazi psychopaths spreading hatred and violence! And look what happened to Joe Cox and that poor jewish MP, Luciana Berger. She was sent hate mail and death threats!” blah, blah, blah!

And, because these politicians are women, it makes it all the more easy to ban those kind of extremist groups!

Now, I’m not too bothered by that, you know, because if you look at the one country that doesn’t have a lot of extreme censorship is America. OK, you can still lose your job, but for the most part, for the most part, it’s not really a problem, if you are financially independent.

Anyway, so as I was saying, … The one country, the one country that doesn’t have extreme censorship laws is the United States. And, “Wow!” by weird coincidence that is also the one country that doesn’t really have a healthy White nationalist movement. At least in electoral terms.

Whereas Europe, which has a lot if, you know, “thought crime” legislation and “hate crime” legislation and that bans little funny cosplay* groups like National Action. This area, or this collection of countries, that is where nationalism is doing much, much, better. Although, of course, in the UK, it’s in a period of abeyance at the moment after, following the collapse of the BNP a few years ago. But, if you look around Europe, they all have these very, very strict, you know, anti, you know, in inverted commas “hate laws” and various other forms of thought crime legislation and, … You know, nationalism is doing relatively well there!

* Cosplay: the practice of dressing up as a character from a film, book, or video game, especially one from the Japanese genres of manga or anime.

Austria — they almost elected somebody from the Austrian Freedom Party! They almost elected somebody from the Austrian Freedom Party, which is typically described as a hard line anti-immigrant party.

In France Marine Le Pen is, you know, again, very, very, you know, a cultural, she’s a cultural nationalist, I guess you could say, civic nationalist, not a religious a genuine ethno-nationalist, but still that’s a lot better than what America’s got. America’s got Donald Trump, and we’re still not really sure of, what we’ve got there. The omens are very, very mixed. He could turn out to be, you know, he could actually turn out to be a decent guy, a stand up guy, who wants to at least ensure the dominance of the Republican Party. Which would also mean deporting a lot of the illegals and securing the borders, and encouraging White people to have more kids. Or he could just be part of the whole the globalist system! A kind of reboot.

[In this friendly interview, Lana Lektoff from Red Ice (Radio 3Fourteen) talks with Arthur Kemp on the past, present and future of White people. Kemp has had long involvement in the White “movement” and has written several books on the subject.

Although he makes many good observations, I would consider his significant weakness to be his downplaying of the jewish problem. His focus is on the symptoms of jewish rule, that is, the deluded liberals who are the outward manifestation of jewish power over the masses through their control of the media, etc.

Also his optimism that Whites will survive is not reassuring as, by “survive” he means that perhaps a few million will remain after the West crumbles.

That said, this is a useful interview in that it gives us an insight into the mind of someone who is on our side and well informed on many issues, yet despite years in this movement, still hasn’t grasped the extent of the central issue of jewish control over us — KATANA.]

Red Ice: Lana Lokteff

Interviews Arthur Kemp

March of the Titans:

The Rise & Fall

of Caucasian Civilization

Click on the above link, or copy the link into your browser to view the audio.

Published on May 16, 2016

Arthur Kemp was born in Southern Rhodesia in 1962. Educated in South Africa, he holds a degree in Political Science, International Politics and Public Administration, having studied at the University of Cape Town and the University of South Africa. He is the owner of Ostara Publications and the author of eleven books, including March of the Titans: The Complete History of the White Race.

Arthur joins us for a look at how the aspects of racial homogeneity and racial disillusionment (multiculturalism) have historically contributed to the rise and fall of civilizations.

We begin by considering the essential questions of what causes culture and what happens when a civilization’s creators vanish. Arthur talks about the misconceptions of early English colonialism and the vastly different process of mass foreign invasion transpiring in the West today.

He addresses the proclivity of the White race to explore the world and provide humanitarian support to the less fortunate, along with the consequences of these interventions.

We discuss some logistics of the Out of Africa theory and the role of environment in racial differences, touching on the bureaucratic baloney that thwarts modern day archaeologists from properly investigating tremendous troves of ancient human remains holding clues of Europeans’ origins in the Northern Hemisphere.

Then, Arthur explains the dire reality of the population replacement events being orchestrated by the West’s rulers, and we deliberate how to wake up the ill-informed masses to their looming extinction.

Kemp also gives an account of his life in South Africa during the ANC’s takeover, relating the hard fact that demographics ultimately dictate the rules.

Our conversation rounds off with thoughts on the viability of recruiting quality Europeans to create a great ethnostate and the terrific potential that exists when enough Whites are able to unlearn their self-defeatist programming and abandon the egalitarian fantasies driving their cultures to demise.

Transcript

Arthur Kemp: It’s a great pleasure Lana. I think you and Red Ice do a great job and I’m very honored to be on your show.

Lana: Well it’s refreshing to speak with you, because I’ve actually tried doing a couple White archeology shows with some racialists and it never turns out good! And unfortunately it can come across a little wacky sometimes. I’m sure you’ve come across that too.

Arthur:Unfortunately, I’ve had more than my fair share of dealing with wacky people, so I know exactly what you’re talking about. But, it doesn’t necessarily have to be. I think what happens a lot of the time, is that people tend to over play what the reality is and sometimes if they’re not not happy with the reality is, they add to it. I think that’s quite common amongst, not only people in this so-called White nationalist movement, but probably everywhere.

Lana: Yes. But when I mentioned to our listeners that you are coming on, a lot of people responded in, saying how, “March of the Titans” was a major eye opener for them, and for me, you know, I just love Euro-centric history and archaeology. “March of the Titans” is a masterful body of work, so I wanted to read a quote to kind of summarize it.

“Most importantly revealed in this work is the one true cause of the rise and fall of the world’s greatest empires. That all civilizations rise and fall according to their racial homogeneity and nothing else. A nation can survive wars, defeats, catastrophes, but not racial dissolution”

Aka, diversity, right? So Rome didn’t collapse from debauchery and decadence. So where do you like to begin when approaching the subject with new-comers?

[Image] Arthur Kemp’s book, “March of the Titans”.]

Arthur: Well, the very first way to understand it, is to take a step back away from any idea or denigrating other people. That’s probably a very important basis to start with. It’s one of the biggest problems in this so-called movement is that it seems to be based more on putting other people down. You don’t have to put anyone else down. All you have to do is stand back and look at it from a purely objective point of view.

[In this very good essay Thomas Dalton outlines the case for his forthcoming translation of Mein Kampf. He also gives a concise summary of Hitler’s position on the major topics of Racial Theory, Religion and Jews. Lastly, Hitler’s legacy is discussed.]

Preface

On 1 January 2016, Mein Kampf came out of copyright. It has now been 70 years since the author’s death, and by international copyright law, legal protection for the book has expired. Thus it is perhaps a good time to reconsider and reexamine this most notorious work—and perhaps to banish some of the many myths surrounding it to history.

In fact, we are long overdue for a revisionist treatment of this work. In my experience, very few people really understand what’s in it. The common man, even the well-educated one, likely knows little more than the title and the author. Revisionists who work on the Holocaust or either of the world wars often bypass the book completely, as if it had no relevance at all; most likely, they have never read it. Traditional journalists, academics, and alleged experts frequently display their ignorance by taking passages out of context, overlooking key facts, or simply failing to cite the author appropriately. More generally, the mainstream approach to Mein Kampf seems be rather similar to its tactics with regard to Holocaust revisionism: ignore, censor, or disparage. It is simply too problematic to discuss this work in a fashion that might lead readers to ask tough questions, or to seek out the book itself.

A large part of the reason for the book’s obscurity is the sorry state of its many English translations. These will be discussed and critiqued below. This is also one of the reasons that I am currently working on a new, parallel German-English translation—the first ever, in fact. I will attempt to remedy many of the shortcomings in current versions, and provide something of a revisionist perspective on the entire work. In the present essay, I examine the translations, discuss some main themes of the book, and argue for its relevance in the present day.

A Most Consequential Work

Mein Kampfis the autobiography and articulated worldview of one of the most consequential and visionary leaders in world history. It is also one of the most maligned and misrepresented texts of the 20th century. There have been so many obfuscations, deceptions, and outright falsehoods circulated about this work that one scarcely knows where to begin. Nonetheless, the time has come to set the story straight.

That Adolf Hitler would even have undertaken such a work is most fortunate. Being neither a formal academic nor a natural writer, and being fully preoccupied with pragmatic matters of party-building, he might never have begun such a major task—were it not for the luxury of a year-long jail term. In one of the many ironies of Hitler’s life, it took just such an adverse event to prompt him to dictate his party’s early history and his own life story. This would become Volume One of his two-part, 700-page magnum opus. It would have a dramatic effect on world history, and initiate a chain of events that has yet to fully play out. In this sense, Mein Kampf is as relevant today as when it was first written.

Perhaps the place to begin is with the rationale for the book. Why did Hitler write it at all? Clearly it was not a requirement; many major politicians in history have come and gone without leaving a personal written record. Even his time in prison could have been spent communicating with party leaders, building support, soliciting allies, and so on. But he chose to spend much of his stay documenting the origins and growth of his new movement. And this was a boon to history as well as to understanding of the human spirit.

Race and People

There are certain truths which stand out so openly on the roadsides of life, as it were, that every passer-by may see them. Yet, because of their very obviousness, the general run of people disregard such truths or at least they do not make them the object of any conscious knowledge. People are so blind to some of the simplest facts in everyday life that they are highly surprised when somebody calls attention to what everybody ought to know. Examples of The Columbus Egg lie around us in hundreds of thousands; but observers like Columbus are rare.

Walking about in the garden of Nature, most men have the self-conceit to think that they know everything; yet almost all are blind to one of the outstanding principles that Nature employs in her work. This principle may be called the inner isolation which characterizes each and every living species on this earth. Even a superficial glance is sufficient to show that all the innumerable forms in which the life-urge of Nature manifests itself are subject to a fundamental law one may call it an iron law of Nature which compels the various species to keep within the definite limits of their own life-forms when propagating and multiplying their kind. Each animal mates only with one of its own species. The tit-mouse cohabits only with the tit-mouse, the finch with the finch, the stork with the stork, the field-mouse with the field-mouse, the house-mouse with the house-mouse, the wolf with the she-wolf, etc.

Deviations from this law take place only in exceptional circumstances. This happens especially under the compulsion of captivity, or when some other obstacle makes procreative intercourse impossible between individuals of the same species. But then Nature abhors such intercourse with all her might; and her protest is most clearly demonstrated by the fact that the hybrid is either sterile or the fecundity of its descendants is limited. In most cases hybrids and their progeny are denied the ordinary powers of resistance to disease or the natural means of defence against outer attack.